Peter wrote:
There are multiple defences to an HMRC attack; basically the “employee” must have no assurance of employment, needs to use their own “tools” (if applicable) etc.
The major IR35 tests which ‘self employed’ pilots fail are what HMRC describe as ‘the right to determine how the work is done’ and ‘the right to substitute another worker’. Clearly a pilot can do neither of these. A person who can do neither of these things is effectively an employee as far as they are concerned.
But yes Ryanair get round it in other ways, firstly layering – putting at least two contractual relationships between the pilot and the airline so as to insulate them from any adverse findings on the legality of the setup, and secondly pooling the pilots together to create an ‘employment agency’ – which crucially does have the right to substitute another worker (pilots can trade shifts).
There’s a history of setting up Southwest Airlines in the good old days, including this:
Southwest’s original crew of hostesses, in 1971, wore a safari jacket and skirt over their more revealing tops and shorts before and after flights. “If someone wants to see the hot pants, they’ve got to buy a ticket,” Lamar Muse said.
Which is funny as Southwest has a reputation for kicking off passengers who are ‘inappropriately dressed’ (maybe due more to overbooking flights?)
Back on subject, I did briefly look at the (very competitive but completely free) Air France cadets when doing my PPL, but decided it wasn’t the kind of job I wanted to do. In fact the only commercial flying that has ever remotely interested me is bush flying on the edge of civilisation, but it’s too great a lifestyle choice. The FAA requirement to have 1,500 hours is a massive indirect subsidy to GA.
Peter wrote:
Only the likes of John Travolta could fund their own 500hr “ATPL unfreezing”
I don’t think he ever did as he, by his own choice, never flew commercial. He also never was PIC on the 707 he had, only SIC.
But at the time, Qantas made it a pre-condition that he passes their 747 rating as they wanted to assess his capabilities before comitting to sponsor his RTW trip with his Qantas 707. From what I read he passed with flying colours and was well regarded by the folks who had to do with him. Certainly a total aviation guy.
Capitaine wrote:
Which is funny as Southwest has a reputation for kicking off passengers who are ‘inappropriately dressed’ (maybe due more to overbooking flights?)
LOL, well, remember Hooters Air?
Sometimes it reminds me of this subject when people comment on those uniforms, which to this day they wear in their pubs. Whoever applies for a job there should know what she’s in for. Complainig later comes across a bit weird.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
In Europe getting 1500 hours to be employed by an airline is next to impossible.
This is kind of a chicken and egg problem: One could also argue that no such structures exist in Europe because there have been no pilots who would fill these roles. The structure of the aviation industry is different because the licensing rules are different…
Mooney_Driver wrote:
The main problem is, that flight schools and recruiters work with inaccurate commercials…
It’s one of the problems – not sure if it is the main one. Core problem is that Airline Pilot is a dream job that attracts certain personalities.
Young people who want to become train conductors and are told by SBB that they do not get a job as apprentice, are very likely to look for another job. Young people who want to be pilots and are told by Lufthansa that they do not get a slot in their training program are likely to pay dozens of thousands to a private flight school. This is why the market is overheated.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
told me they get 150 applications per job
150 applications for an attractive job is all but uncommon these days in almost any business.
The problem is not the 150 applications – the problem is that the 149 applicants that do not get the job never thought about a plan b.
Malibuflyer wrote:
The structure of the aviation industry is different because the licensing rules are different…
You answer your own thesis there. Yes, no structure exists because licencing prevents it. But looking at the safety record of Europe’s entry level airlines, there is no need for it either.
Malibuflyer wrote:
Core problem is that Airline Pilot is a dream job that attracts certain personalities.
Of course. The advertizement is exactly aiming at them, as there is a group of people they can target and who are likely to see that blinking thing in the water and swallow hook, line and sinker. That is the main goal of any advertizer, be it the Marlborogh man or airline pilot or Channel No5. They all suggest satisfaction of a deep desire, which in most cases won’t happen.
Malibuflyer wrote:Young people who want to become train conductors and are told by SBB that they do not get a job as apprentice, are very likely to look for another job.
As a matter of fact, SBB are desparate for train driver apprentices these days.
Malibuflyer wrote:
Young people who want to be pilots and are told by Lufthansa that they do not get a slot in their training program are likely to pay dozens of thousands to a private flight school. This is why the market is overheated.
The reason for that being availability. There are hundreds of airlines outside Lufthansa. But there are hardly any choices for a rejected train driver.
In the end, the whole thing depends on addiction. Aviation can be an addiction just like drugs, sex or alcohol. In fact, the analogy with the Marlborogh man is not that far fetched: Both suggest a very male kind of environment with “bonuses” thrown in. And if I remember some airlines I used to be close to, most of it was true as well. Nowadays, it is antiquated and politically incorrect, not unlike what happened in the entertainment industry as well. That is not at all bad, but it is a reality which many who have grown up wide eyed with the tales of Rudolf Braunburg or Jack Bennet and many others have yet to face. And talking of PC, this also very much goes for cabin crew today. It is a different set up but some of it is still very much alive.
(as a sideline: when I was working as a free lance writer for a flight simulation mag, I started to write up stories about flights for the readers to replicate with their simulated airliners. After a while, they changed from purely technical write ups to actual stories in the tradition of those writers I mentioned, using clichees of aircrew life. Well, the readership loved them and kept asking for more, even sending me screenshots of what to do next. Up to the point where parts of them got published in a book which also sold well. So the myth of the airline pilot is very much alive and kicking, particularly with those outside the actual profession. )
remember Hooters Air?
Did that one ever take off?
Gosh – two puns in one go 
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Whoever applies for a job there should know what she’s in for. Complainig later comes across a bit weird.
You mean like the Swiss people buying a home next to an airfield and later voting that the traffic pattern has to stay away from their home?
Sorry for the diversion, could not help it
Edit to cross out “Swiss” …happens most everywhere…just change “voting” for “protesting”
Graham wrote:
pooling the pilots together to create an ‘employment agency’
But in such a setup, the pilots must surely be regular employees of said agency and be treated as such?
Traditionally, the individual has his own Ltd Co which is a contractor to the Ltd Co which provides the service to the “employer”.
So e.g. Fred Smith the pilot will have Fred Smith (2021) Ltd which provides aircraft piloting services, and the employer deals only with Aviation Staff Agency Ltd which subcontracts to 100 Ltd companies like Fred Smith’s. The employer pays ASA Ltd on a 120 day credit basis while ASA pays its contractors on a weekly basis (because “Fred Smith” is always short of money and need to be paid every week ) and to cover this, ASA has to make a nice margin.
I don’t know the RYA details but this is how contract software and other design was done since for ever. There are many tax perks e.g. your wife (who let’s say is home with kids and her tax allowances are thus wasted) can draw a salary from the company for “admin services”.
If Fred flies for more than one airline, it is very difficult to attack this scheme. It is also difficult to attack it if Fred moves around airlines. Otherwise, in the UK, it would probably not stand up, but RYA is not a UK company, is it?
